American media has officially defined Anarchism as grim disarray, absolute chaos, and lawless abandon.
The history of Anarchism, which I barely know and care little for, is much more sophisticated. Libertarian-Socialism, the classic form of Anarchism was an ideal bridging of characteristics from both schools of political thought. The devotion to civil liberty and the structure and priority of the social sphere as the solitary roles of the state.
When individuals are serious about contributing to any political discourse, this is the Anarchism they are providing.
Antifa, ELF, John Zerzan, black-clad LARPers of revolution—these groups veil themselves in “Anarchism” as a power emblem, enforcing the extreme, hardcore aura that elevates their esteem.
Media is to blame not only for the currently accepted definition of Anarchism but for spawning those people whose actions have contributed to the definition.
See The Baader-Meinhof Complex (2008)
Attractive people doing revolution.
For those at a loss for identity, who wish to be part of something larger than themselves, who have all the misplaced hubris of the youth, Anarchism in this manner checks all the boxes.
But true Anarchism it’s much less sexy, much more boring, and much harder work.
Anarchism is the tendency to scrutinize authority and dismantle authority if it’s found to be invalid.
There is truly nothing more.